Oh, wait, I did point it out! Thatt's how you learned about it!
Hell, my very first post to this subthread said "The guys at KDE/Cygwin have a version that doesn't require X".
Now, I may be naïve, but I think my words could have been construed as to mean that there is a Qt/win32 that doesn't require X.
What was your answer? I've responsed to everything you said in the message you're replying to.
Which means, since you have accepted you didn't knew about the qt3/win32 port, and "the message I was replying to" contanined stuff about Qt requiring X on win32 (over and over), I decided that you either:
a) didn't bother reading my post, yet decided to reply like an asshole
b) read it, didn't understand it, yet replied like an asshole.
So, I called you an asshole. And still I taught you something. Ain't I nice?
I am even willing to accept you are not an asshole in general, but were only acting like one momentarily, so here you have it:
I already mentioned the three factual errors in a post you replied to.
a) You still have not agreed that you said X was required for a free Qt in win32, despite several clarifications.
So, you can't go around calling anyone childish with a straight face, much less say you are trying to have a rational discussion.
If you won't accept even a clear mistake, why should I bother trying to educate you on the others?
b) That's not what they say. They say the free non-commercial edition is not enough, so there is a need for the Qt/win32 GPL port.
How on earth can you even think that the qt/win32 project is saying that the qt/win32 is not enough, and that the solution is... the qt/win32 project???
No you didn't. If you think you did, you are ignorant.
For one thing, you seem to be under the assumption that the port I referred to is not a port to "win32 proper".
You are confusing this: http://kde-cygwin.sourceforge.net/
with this: http://kde-cygwin.sourceforge.net/qt3-win32/
And they are not the same. The second uses just mingw32, which is not the cygwin posix layer, but just a plain C/C++ compiler for win32.
There are at least three other factually wrong pieces in your post, but I won't bother pointing them up to you, since you believe you already answered me. Had you been any less of an asshole, you would have learned.
Now, be a grownup and stop pretending to know what you are talking about, please.
a) The guys at KDE/Cygwin have a version that doesn't require X. Sadly, it's not being worked on now.
b) How do you think GTK got to win32? Simple answer: someone took a X toolkit and ported it.
The Trolls have been nice enough to give you a cute, pretty, well-designed X toolkit. You want it in windows? Port it, or help someone else port it.
The only differences, platform-wise between Qt and GTK are:
a) GTK's windows port is ahead of the free Qt port
b) GTK's windows port is behind the commercial Qt port
c) Qt's free port to OSX is ahead of GTK's
All that would be required to put Qt ahead on all counts, portability-wise, would be for someone who actually uses windows and likes Qt's technical stuff to work on it for a month or two.
For the iso9660 stuff, I'll take your word for it, although I have yet to see a iso9660 DVD.
For the fstab, related problem, wrong thinking.
On the root argument of the bootloader, you can also put a LABEL=/ instead of a/dev/hda1 or whatever.
Both cause different problems. If the bootloader has it wrong, you will get a "no init" problem. If fstab has it wrong, it will fail at a later stage in the boot, when it tries to remount / read-write
Well, it does provide the functionality you mentioned. If it doesn't provide stuff you *didn't* mention, I have no idea. Maybe there are other ways to provide it.
In case you missed it, no person was enslaved in the creation of that software. The slave reference is about a string of 0s and 1s. Which are probably non-african in ancestry.
It's not part of KDE because it's not for KDE, not based on any KDE technology, doesn't need KDE, and KDE doesn't need it. Not *everything* has to be part of KDE;-)
As for why it's not part of Fedora or whatever... beats me. It works pretty well.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=102104&thres ho ld=1&commentsort=0&tid=189&mode=thread&cid=8706269
made a clear distinction between per product and per platform.
I don't know if you were him (I suppose not), but anyway, the "per product" in this thread clearly can't mean Qt/X11-Qt/OSX-Qt-Win32, as that was covered by the "per-platform" part of that post.
So, you are not replying to what you think you are replying.
Yes, you have to pay a license per platform. Or pay for a set of platforms. I didn't deny that.
What I did deny is that it was "per product" as in the original post, which was bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
It wasn't planned, like "Roberto, fix my computer, and we will get laid".
I really, innocently fixed her computer out of the goodness of my heart, and she then decided a nice guy deserved to get into her bed.
And yes, I can post this under my own name, it was a nice thing.
Well, I could have pointed out about qt3/win32.
Oh, wait, I did point it out! Thatt's how you learned about it!
Hell, my very first post to this subthread said "The guys at KDE/Cygwin have a version that doesn't require X".
Now, I may be naïve, but I think my words could have been construed as to mean that there is a Qt/win32 that doesn't require X.
What was your answer? I've responsed to everything you said in the message you're replying to.
Which means, since you have accepted you didn't knew about the qt3/win32 port, and "the message I was replying to" contanined stuff about Qt requiring X on win32 (over and over), I decided that you either:
a) didn't bother reading my post, yet decided to reply like an asshole
b) read it, didn't understand it, yet replied like an asshole.
So, I called you an asshole. And still I taught you something. Ain't I nice?
I am even willing to accept you are not an asshole in general, but were only acting like one momentarily, so here you have it:
I already mentioned the three factual errors in a post you replied to.
a) You still have not agreed that you said X was required for a free Qt in win32, despite several clarifications.
... the qt/win32 project???
So, you can't go around calling anyone childish with a straight face, much less say you are trying to have a rational discussion.
If you won't accept even a clear mistake, why should I bother trying to educate you on the others?
b) That's not what they say. They say the free non-commercial edition is not enough, so there is a need for the Qt/win32 GPL port.
How on earth can you even think that the qt/win32 project is saying that the qt/win32 is not enough, and that the solution is
That makes no sense at all!
Uh... I meant that
9 13 1651
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=107315&cid=
that is from anonymous coward... *I* posted it. It doesn't have my name in it.
That was me, I just had logged out. Reply to this one if you want me to be notified of it.
No you didn't. If you think you did, you are ignorant.
For one thing, you seem to be under the assumption that the port I referred to is not a port to "win32 proper".
You are confusing this: http://kde-cygwin.sourceforge.net/
with this: http://kde-cygwin.sourceforge.net/qt3-win32/
And they are not the same. The second uses just mingw32, which is not the cygwin posix layer, but just a plain C/C++ compiler for win32.
There are at least three other factually wrong pieces in your post, but I won't bother pointing them up to you, since you believe you already answered me. Had you been any less of an asshole, you would have learned.
Now, be a grownup and stop pretending to know what you are talking about, please.
a) The guys at KDE/Cygwin have a version that doesn't require X. Sadly, it's not being worked on now.
b) How do you think GTK got to win32? Simple answer: someone took a X toolkit and ported it.
The Trolls have been nice enough to give you a cute, pretty, well-designed X toolkit. You want it in windows? Port it, or help someone else port it.
The only differences, platform-wise between Qt and GTK are:
a) GTK's windows port is ahead of the free Qt port
b) GTK's windows port is behind the commercial Qt port
c) Qt's free port to OSX is ahead of GTK's
All that would be required to put Qt ahead on all counts, portability-wise, would be for someone who actually uses windows and likes Qt's technical stuff to work on it for a month or two.
I confused it with "Open Source". Sorry!
Weird, I am pretty sure I did check it a few months ago.
Linux is not a registered trademark. At least not in the US.
ESR applied to register it, and made a huge fuss about it. Then it was either denied or lapsed, and noone noticed.
Saying that Richard Stallman started Harmony is like saying Rush Limbaugh started the invasion to Iraq.
Both are largely cheerleaders, not doers.
RMS used to do stuff, he hasn't in quite a while.
For the iso9660 stuff, I'll take your word for it, although I have yet to see a iso9660 DVD.
/dev/hda1 or whatever.
For the fstab, related problem, wrong thinking.
On the root argument of the bootloader, you can also put a LABEL=/ instead of a
Both cause different problems. If the bootloader has it wrong, you will get a "no init" problem. If fstab has it wrong, it will fail at a later stage in the boot, when it tries to remount / read-write
It's more like "if his distro hadn't fucked up, this would have worked right"
Well, it does provide the functionality you mentioned. If it doesn't provide stuff you *didn't* mention, I have no idea. Maybe there are other ways to provide it.
well, there's treeline, but it's more of an outliner.
In KDE:
;-) since around 1998
Alt+F2
Want to start an app? start typing its name, and it autocompletes
Want to open a URL? Type it
Want to search in google? type gg:whateveryouwant
Same for a few other dozen search engines, translate between languages, and more.
Has been there (couldn't do all this
Well, I supposed it is adequate for an "Anonymous coward" to be scared of words.
And anyway:
Check out BitchX. And the PimpAssNewsReader, too.
Can't find anything for cocksucker or cunt, though.
In case you missed it, no person was enslaved in the creation of that software. The slave reference is about a string of 0s and 1s. Which are probably non-african in ancestry.
Get a real concern. This is stupid.
I don understand what you mean.
You are compiling software. Ever tried to do that on other operating systems? Was it any easier to uninstall afterwards?
Or you mean there should be a KDE frontend for checkinstall? If yes, well, I am pretty sure I can write one in a weekend, but I don't feel a need yet.
For the hard disk stuff: your distro should have used LABEL=/ instead of /dev/hda in your fstab, and avoided this problem.
Of course if you do that, and you add another disk with the same label, things get dicey.
As for the DVD: if you want a data DVD, why are you formatting it as a CD? DVDs are supposed to be UDF, not ISO9660.
In fact, it's a miracle Linux mounted that disk. And a minor one that some app bothered creating it!
Weird. I can't even remember the last time I had to do it for hardware to work. Probably around 1999.
I have had to do it to get weird iptables functionality, though.
It's not part of KDE because it's not for KDE, not based on any KDE technology, doesn't need KDE, and KDE doesn't need it. Not *everything* has to be part of KDE ;-)
As for why it's not part of Fedora or whatever... beats me. It works pretty well.
Use checkinstall.
As long as you are on a RPM based distro, or on Debian, it should enable you to uninstall the stuff you compile with minimal effort.
This argument is stupid. The original post:
s ho ld=1&commentsort=0&tid=189&mode=thread&cid=8706269
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=102104&thre
made a clear distinction between per product and per platform.
I don't know if you were him (I suppose not), but anyway, the "per product" in this thread clearly can't mean Qt/X11-Qt/OSX-Qt-Win32, as that was covered by the "per-platform" part of that post.
So, you are not replying to what you think you are replying.
Yes, you have to pay a license per platform. Or pay for a set of platforms. I didn't deny that.
What I did deny is that it was "per product" as in the original post, which was bullshit.
Uh? If you buy the DuoPack it's one product.